A menu, found on the table of the Duke of Cambridge Organic Pub in Islington, London, outlines (in a broad range of categories) various values and operating principles to which this business subscribes.

Recognising that product and process are intrinsically intertwined, Duke of Cambridge tallies its policy information like badges of honour alongside the specific year when each value was adopted: 'No airfreight; 2003'

Presented in a similar manner to the way in which fine wines are listed, by vintage, the dates here also acknowledge a need for growth and change in value systems to reflect society at large e.g. the 'Chemical Free Cigarettes' policy (started in 1999) ended in 2007, presumably coinciding with the U.K. smoking ban.

Brands and their products are of course inseparable, and fast-knowledge-hungry consumers are happy to pay a little more if they can be given assurances regarding the provenance of their chosen product.  Anita Roddick, founder of Body Shop and early promoter of Fair Trade produce, knew that 'fairness' can be good for business, and a quotation from her on the back of the menu situates this eatery in a lineage of ethical consumerism:

"If business comes with no moral sympathy or honorable code of behaviour, God help us all."  Anita Roddick, (1942 - 2007)

Another City, another menu, this time Newcastle and the visiting Feral Trade Cafe where once again process is at the fore:

'Feral Trade Menu items have been brought in over moving social networks, including vacation, commuter and funded cultural travel. Stocks are limited by the haulage power of our couriers; dine early to avoid scarcity, see specials board for arrivals, departures and shipping disasters. Feral Trade has been trading groceries outside commercial systems since 2003.'

Proprietor Kate Rich is proud to source goods and ingredients direct from the producers, transporting them 'peer-to-peer' along pre-existing lines of supply - the international travel routes taken by artists and friends in her own extended social network.

There are two 'strands' of Feral Trade produce:

Home Manufactured Goods and Hi-Jacked Products - and a good example of the latter is the 'open-source' Cube Cola (administered at Feral Trade Cafe Newcastle, mixed with soda, delivered through the very infrastructure of the dominant cola in the marketplace.)

Feral Trade Goods are served with a comprehensive invoice (which doubles as a placemat) and even a cursory glance reveals an information overload. 

We are provided with testimony as to the place of origin, the name of the individual who personally delivered the goods and when and via which flight - personal details which actually open up more questions than answers.  This critical function clearly differentiates 'Feral Trade Goods' from the domain of 'ethical consumerism' and Fair Trade which seem hell-bent on providing consumers with all of the information they need to put their conscience at ease.

One final menu in this small collection which I would like to draw reference to was that used at The Meat Licence Proposal's 'Year of Activism' Dinner back at the beginning of 2009.

Here, no actual information was provided regarding the origins of the food - and instead the menus doubled as formal legal contracts. 

In a grotesque formalisation of etiquette, invited guests were asked by their host to add their signature to the menu in order to formally give consent for the meal to take place.

On the 29th of January 2010, The Meat Licence Proposal introduced - 'CLINIC' - a new consultation framework for engaging the public with aspects of the proposed Meat Licencing Law.

Find out more information about 'CLINIC' here.

Outlined below are some of the contributions put forward during January's Meat Licence Proposal 'CLINIC' session, along with the suggested remedies:

ETHICS:

Event organiser Nils, was the first 'CLINIC' guinea pig (thanks Nils!)  His immediate issue was simply that some individuals who currently eat meat would not feel able to kill animals (on ethical grounds) and that this could lead to people eating meat in secret - without the Licence.

ENFORCEMENT

Any Meat Licencing Legislation will have to face up to the problem of secret Meat Eaters or "Meat Heads" (to use a phrase coined by Liverpool author Arthur Ellison.)

How could such a law be enforced?

We looked to current examples where individuals already 'secretly' break laws and could identify 3 clear strategies which might be implemented:

1. Social Monitoring - for the law to be successful, there would need to be a degree of 'social stigma' attached to unlicenced meat eating so that neighbours could report one another to relevant authorities (and this is already the case with other unlicenced activities - trade, performance, events etc.)
2. CCTV - existing CCTV operatives could be instructed to monitor eating habits and this would provide evidence in the case of any dispute regarding licenced status.
3. Implement Technologies which 'sense' meat eating.  (An analogy might be drawn here to vehicle speed cameras which use sensors to detect the speed at which individuals are travelling and administer penalties for lawbreaking.)

PRACTICALITY

An anonymous contributor was concerned at the practical difficulty involved in obtaining the licence - especially with people's lives being so busy.

How might inconvenience and bureaucracy be minimised in the act Licencing?

A novel and convenient solution was proposed where individuals could kill smaller animals in their own homes using commercially available domestic appliances such as a "Home Chicken Killer" or "Home Rabbit Killer."  This is a highly practical solution for pro-active citizens.

SOCIAL

Philippe and Marina brought up a highly important problem:  Many urban dwellers are totally unfamiliar with the process whereby meat arrives.  If individuals have never been around animals, killing them could seem socially unacceptable and breed divisions amongst friends.

Three very positive policies were suggested for socialising the process of killing:

1. More animals need to be integrated into the city environment (through city farm projects, animal adoption schemes etc.)
2. All chefs and meat handlers could be required to deal with meat "on the hoof" so that the conceptual link between animal and meat is retained until the point of consumption.
3. Children in reception class could be schooled in 'killing' through abatoir visits and lessons akin to science class dissections.

ECONOMIC

Gallerist, Aoife Van Linden Tol felt that the Proposal itself is being marketed in a negative and moralising way - especially with the use of the words "ought" and "should."

Popular appeal for the licence could be generated through incentivisation schemes from central government and industry.  In-keeping with the current 'organic farming movement' the status of licenced meat could be made even more precious and a workable market model could be developed, truly integrating The Meat Licence Proposal into British Society.

Branding strategies could include:

• setting a high standard through hierarchies of Licence (for individuals, distribution and meat production)
• use of Meat Licence Proposal symbol on meat products so that individuals can show support for the Proposal through their purchases
• "participatory production line" events at slaughterhouses where families and friends can obtain their licence together.

"Ultimately, The Meat Licence Proposal must engage and identify with the values of 'the market' where PRODUCTION (killing animals) is about making money and CONSUMPTION (eating meat) is about getting what we want."

The Meat Licence Proposal wishes to thank Anita McKeown of "Tasty! Talks" for the opportunity to launch this new scheme and Nils, (organisor of Dirty Cop Friday) for hosting 'CLINIC' at the Old Deptford Police Station, Deptford.

During 2010 The Meat Licence Proposal will be focusing on a theme of "DIY LAW MAKING.

To start this off there will be a special Meat Licence Proposal event taking place in London on Friday 29th of January, which is being supported by TASTY! Talks.

The old police station, 'do it yourself art centre,' is an experimental economic and social model, occupying the old Deptford police station, with a radio station, cafe, supper clubs in the prison cells, a cafe open Tues-Sat, large gallery, DJband space, 3 independent project spaces and over 40 artist studios.

The act of naming (as opposed to numbering) is very powerful.  In naming animals, we identify with the individual animal - and it is no longer merely one of the herd. 

The act of naming is so important in human cultures that it is often accompanied by ritual, and, a given name is carefully selected and rarely (if ever) changed.

Indeed, scientists at a University in the North East of England have recently published research indicating that cows with names will produce more milk.

It is rare that animals earmarked for slaughter are given names - naming is typically a ritual reserved for animals intended to be kept as pets.  So, the news that China is drafting a Proposal to ban it's citizens from eating the meat of cats and dogs should come as no surprise. 

Apparently: "In ancient times, dog meat was considered a medicinal tonic...." BUT "...In recent years... ...such traditions are increasingly criticised by an affluent, pet-loving, urban middle class"

Such moves seem symptomatic of a global phenomena of state intervention into social and cultural practices - in this Chinese instance, the motive seems to be part of a strategic re-branding exercise.

The Great Species Wall of China

Of course, to some in the West (and in China itself), the proposed Chinese ban seems patently hypocritical - "How do you justify the slaughter of one animal for food and yet prohibit the slaughter of another?"

This charge however, makes a naive assumption that Governmental legislation is implemented to ensure a level of consistent action.  In fact the function of such a "No Cats & No Dogs Act" would be to justify widespread hypocrisy and to artificially ascribe a never-before-acknowledged boundary in China, between different species of animal.

It is hardly surprising to see that the Chinese Authorities have been consulting with Britain's pet-loving RSPCA - a group which describes and supports four distinct categories of animal instrumentalisation:

Our Pets - "Comfort"
Wildlife - "Decoration"
Farm Animals - "Food"
Laboratory Animals - "Science"
 
Whilst The Meat Licence Proposal is in some respects bolstered by this new legal framework being drafted to intervene in thoughtless killing, it would always be preferable to enact an engaged rather than prohibitive approach to lawmaking.

As I understand it, The Meat Licence Proposal does not seek to legislate against our human propensity for contradiction, but instead to distinguish between this contraditory quality, and a pitiful, lazy, hypocrisy when it comes to "what we kill" and "how we kill it."

Our Year of Activism - 2009 - constituted a very busy period of consciousness raising actions which sought to discuss, debate and develop the The Meat Licence Proposal towards the enactment of a collaboratively developed Meat Licencing law.

Four key events of 2009:

1.  The year began with the splendid 'Year of Activism' launch dinner, hosted in conjunction with Metal in Liverpool.  The menu for the evening was a specially drafted legal contract - requiring the diners consent for the dinner to go-ahead and the space was embellished with Chris Rodenhurst's terrific sketches - imagining a British society completely at ease with the Proposal.   20 invited guests discussed and debated the Proposal's underlying principles, from a wide range of specialist perspectives including law and ethics, interactive design, contemporary art, fiction, and philosophy.  After the event, attendee Prof. Andy Miah cited The Meat Licence Proposal as symptomatic of a kind of ethical zeitgeist in his Guardian online piece - "We're all activists now."

2.  The 'Feasts and Feasting' Salon hosted by Kira O'Reilly (part of London's new Spill Festival of performance, live-art and experimental theatre) was a terrific opportunity to present The Meat Licence Proposal alongside the work of artists Boo Chapple and Adele Varcoe whose participatory performance work "Hand to Mouth" brings all of the production processes of bizarre gourmet foods into the same space as the diners.  During the salon it was also a privilege to hear the remarkable perspective of food archeologist Martin Jones, whose book 'Feast: Why Humans Share Food' frames the human ritual of sharing food as intrinsically intertwined with human social and political evolution.

3.  FACT's 'Climate for Change' Exhibition played host to the Inaugural Public Meeting of The Meat Licence Proposal - a threshold event where the intangible nature of 'law' was eloquently debated by members of the public from many walks of life.  The event saw the launch of the first 'Meat Licence Proposal Public Information Film,' produced by Tim Brunsden (and with the voice of Sarah Nicolls.)  The film began to outline the ambitions of The Meat Licence Proposal as an organisation which is proposing a distinctly new kind of law - a law which would compel engagement.

Clearly, one of the important roles that The Meat Licence Proposal can play in society is in engaging a dis-interested public in the origin of and process of law.  But, whilst, discussion and debate about current legal inadequacies are of vital importance, it is the future of law-making that must be our primary concern.

During 2010, DIY LAW MAKING will be our theme and throughout the year The Meat Licence Proposal will strive to explore, create and distribute new kinds of interface between citizen and law.

John O'Shea
Projects Co-Ordinator
The Meat Licence Proposal

P.S.  If you attended an event during 2009, collaborated on a project or simply shared your opinion - thank you!  You are encouraged to add comments about your experience below:

"Pat Blood & Partners" - local Liverpool firm.

Interesting to see animals being given fairer status appraisal here - being classed as 'partners' in the business.  (And pictured below being given a 'piggy-back!')

pat blood

Recent trip to Newcastle, saw this helpful grafitti attempting to limit the spread of (so-called) Swine Flu.  In case you are worried, symptoms are outlined below.

Image Source: Wikimedia Commons

Also, in large shopping precinct, big promotion by Edible Ltd. - company responsible for bringing Ostrich Egg Omlette and Crocodile Thai Curry to the attention of the UK consumer.

Moose Paté - ethically sourced of course!

In his ISEA2009 keynote, Clive Van Heerden discussed the Philips 'Design Probes' project where, in order to downgrade the emphasis on technologies, the focus is on future lifestyles and applications.  The 'Probes,' which are a publicised outcome of the research, act as provocations, echo-soundings and sanity tests - looking for an honest reaction - to indicate potential future directions for the Philips Corporation.

One such probe is the 'LIVING ROOM FARM' (above.) Van Heerden emphasised the point that these are much more than mere design concepts - the technology involved may not be readily available but this is far from 'pie in the sky'...

3 aims for the probes are:

• to push a socio-cultural button
• push the creative element
• and, question the technological area

"Could you sustain 5000 calories in a biosphere in a high rise?" - Biosphere Home Farming a feasibility? It would certainly reduce 'food miles' but what about safety? Philips Design Probes attempted to envisage a closed loop system using only natural processes - the only by-product being oxygen.

 Early research process for the design probes is non-linear, instead focussing on the terrain eg: Combinations of (cultural, economic, technological, environmental, political) factors which may influence future lifestyles (2020, 2030 etc.) are examined and weak signals are identified (small news articles, overheard conversations, contrary commentaries.)

Weak signals leading to LIVING ROOM FARM were news reports of 'food riots,' a BBC2 documentary focussing on an impending global food shortage and a supermarket in London setting a 10kg limit on rice.

Philips, with their heritage of developing 'labour-saving devices' for the domestic kitchen seemed frustrated at an apparent technological plateau - "we're still using electric motors to beat eggs". Further examples discussed also came from the current trend of people 'WANTING TO KNOW WHERE THEIR FOOD COMES FROM.'

Design Probes came up with the 'DIAGNOSTIC KITCHEN' for "the consumer who is more interested in the CONTENTS of the pan rather than whether it will stick to it." The problem is - what is a healthy diet for one person may not be for another - with differing metabolisms, allergies, lifestyles etc.

The DIAGNOSTIC WAND would look at the individual's specific diagnostic profile - prompting a suitable menu. This information could then be communicated to a PHILIPS FOOD PRINTER ("when molecular gastronomy becomes an everyday phenomena"...)

Ultimately, Philips Design Probes are attempting to second guess the consumer, and gain an insight into how a culture is changing.

Whatever your future 'need,' - REST ASSURED - Philips (one amongst a many multinational consumer technology giants) will be there waiting with the very product to satisfy that NEED.